IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT &

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA

th

ON THE 11 OF DECEMBER, 2025 FIRST APPEAL No. 1601 of 2023 NITESH SHARMA Versus SMT. NIDHI SHARMA Appearance:

Shri Brijendra Kumar Mishra - Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Anil Kumar Mishra - Advocate for the respondent.

JUDGMENT Per: Justice Anuradha Shukla Appellant (herein after referred to as husband) is challenging here the judgment dated 27.06.2023 delivered by Principal Judge, Family Court Anuppur, District Anuppur (M.P.) in RCS HM No.51/2020 whereby the divorce petition filed by husband was dismissed.

2. Facts not in dispute are that parties were married on 28.01.2016 and a son was born to them. It is also not disputed that a Samjhautanama (compromise decree) was executed between them and husband also got a report of non-cognizable offence registered against respondent.

3. Brief facts narrated in divorce petition are that, respondent (herein after referred to as wife) started misbehaving with husband and his family members just after the marriage and later this mis-behaviour turned more grave when she started giving filthy abuses, using physical violence and damaging the house hold items. She was careless even to her new born child and used to physically torture him too. Husband discussed this abnormal behaviour of wife with her parents who informed him about her mental illness. Husband then took her to the psychiatrist and her treatment was started. She left for her parental house and after executing the Sanjhautanama on 22.10.2018 she came back to the matrimonial house. Still there was no change in her cruel behaviour. On 10.02.2020, she physically assaulted the husband, his mother and even her own son and damaged the CCTV camera. The matter was reported to police upon which NCR No.34/2020 was registered. According to husband, he was not able to continue the matrimonial life with respondent/wife for the reason of her mental illness and cruel behaviour. It was further submitted that without informing the husband, wife left for her parental house on 28.04.2020. A request was therefore made to pass the decree of divorce.

4. Respondent/wife has denied all the allegations made against her behaviour and illness. According to her, she was facing cruelty in her matrimonial house as her father could not fulfil the demand of dowry made by husband and his relatives. They used to give threats of second marriage of appellant/husband. She was bearing with all this cruel treatment in the hope that things would improve in future. Under the fear of threats given by the husband and his relatives, she did not communicate her dismal condition to her parental relatives and signed the Samjhautanama. She thereafter returned to her matrimonial house but again she was tortured mentally and physically and a false report at NCR No.34/2020 was made against her. It was submitted that respondent/wife had no source of income and appellant/husband was not providing any maintenance to her and their minor sone. A request was therefore made to dismiss the divorce petition.

5. The Family Court framed three issues on the basis of pleadings of the parties. They are:-

"1. (cid:1)या अनावे(cid:8)दका (cid:11)ारा आवेदक के साथ (cid:16)ववाह के प(cid:19)ात ्से ह(cid:22) दा(cid:23)प(cid:24)य संबंध के दौरान मानिसक एवं शार(cid:22)(cid:33)रक (cid:34)प से (cid:35)ता(cid:8)ड़त कर करता पूवक(cid:38) (cid:39)यवहार (cid:8)कया जा रहा है?

2. (cid:1)या आवेदक, अनावे(cid:8)दका से (cid:16)ववाह (cid:16)व(cid:42)छेद क(cid:44) (cid:8)डक(cid:44) पान ◌े का अिधकार(cid:22)

है?

3. सहायता एवं (cid:39)यय?"

6. Parties were given opportunity to submit evidence on these issues. Total eight documents were submitted on behalf of appellant/husband, while no documentary evidence was produced by wife. Both the parties examined two witnesses each in support of their claim. The trial Court dismissed the divorce petition but it is apparent that, under the impugned judgment, it has g